Politics Today is Just a Hobby for the Rich

Oregon Magazine ^ | August 1, 2003 | Thomas Lipscomb

[WaterDragon]

Six term Rhode Island Congressional Representative Patrick J. Kennedy let the cat out of the bag last week at a Young Democrats meeting in Washington: “ I don’t need Bush’s tax cut. I’ve never worked a f….ing day in my life.”

Kennedy makes $154,700 in his Congressional salary alone for 251 days work a year, about five times the income of the average American.

He also benefits from a Federal retirement and medical plan worth millions-- far better than the constantly endangered Social Security-Medicare programs Congress thinks is good enough for the ordinary citizen.

And he gets hundreds of thousands of additional taxpayer dollars to pay for his staff, offices and their expenses, but this is just chicken feed to a rich heir to the Kennedy fortune. The fact that the stock market took off like a scalded cat after the Bush tax cut he didn’t need seems to have escaped him....(snip)

The problem with rich hobbyists who start at the top is that they haven’t a clue what the real responsibilities of their office might be nor do they care to understand the most pressing problems in the life of an ordinary citizen.

There is no better example than New York’s current mayor. Facing the city’s largest financial crisis in 100 years, Mike Bloomberg spends weekends playing golf in Bermuda, interrupts an appointment with a family trying to get his help in finding some remains to bury of a 9-11 victim to make a Knicks game, and adds another tax hike on the most heavily taxed citizens in the country.

No wonder businesses and New York’s most productive citizens are leaving town. And no wonder Bloomberg is rated as being out of touch with the needs of ordinary New Yorkers by over ¾ of those polled this week....(snip)

Click HERE For Complete Article!

[Ed_in_NJ]

And those that aren't rich when they get in (i42, for example) soon get there -- just running for office is a great business!

[Old Sarge]

The word, I think, is oligarchy...

[NonValueAdded]

That ought to touch a nerve! I wouldn't say being rich was an automatic disqualifier for public office. Why exclude successful people from the talent pool? But as this article points out, you must ask how that person earned their wealth before deciding.

Rhode Island, what the hell are you thinking?

[RightWhale]

The problem with rich hobbyists who start at the top is that they haven’t a clue what the real responsibilities of their office might be nor do they care to understand the most pressing problems in the life of an ordinary citizen.

An interesting premise, but probably won't hold up in most cases.

[nothingnew]

Paging Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith. Time to go to Washington.

FMCDH

[anncoulteriscool]

Yep. Cable talk shows are millionaire republicans argueing with millionaire democrats over who cares the most about the middle class. Another good reason to not have cable. LOL!

[WaterDragon]

The problem with rich hobbyists who start at the top is that they haven’t a clue what the real responsibilities of their office might be nor do they care to understand the most pressing problems in the life of an ordinary citizen

I think the qualifier "rich hobbyists" trues the statement. Obviously, not every rich politician is in politics merely as a hobby, as other parts of the article point out.

[anniegetyourgun]

"Six term Rhode Island Congressional Representative Patrick J. Kennedy let the cat out of the bag last week at a Young Democrats meeting in Washington: “ I don’t need Bush’s tax cut. I’ve never worked a f….ing day in my life.”

For all his riches, he's still a potty-mouthed, know-nothing, twit.

[RightWhale]

That might be. We've probably all seen the rich hobbiests at political picnics and other events, and they are never talking politics, but who knows who and how so-and-so couldn't come. Purely social, they might as well be at a bridge tournament.

[kabar]

It is not only wealth but family ties that now inhabit politics. You inherit political office or receive it through marriage. Look at the Kennedys, Bushes, Clintons, Doles, Murkowskis, Robb (Johnson son-in-law), et. al.

[WaterDragon]

Re Patrick Kennedy....For all his riches, he's still a potty-mouthed, know-nothing, twit.

Amen!

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

No, the word is Kakistocracy.

[bert]

Politics is always the sideline of the rich. The best way to keep the second sons from killing the first sons is to give them political jobs. They can then mess up the lives of others while keeping their brothers alive.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

No. Plutocracy.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Hmm, I'm going to suggest it's both.

Rule by the wealthiest, AND worst elements of society

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

You assume the current "leadership" ever belonged to our society. If you look at their antecedents they come from the criminal class,the vice addicts,actors, homosexuals,etc. etc. In short those who in less sick times are known as OUTCASTS! OUTLAWS!

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I should have pointed you to my post #13.

I originally said we were a Kakistocracy, which is rule by the worst elements of a society. But upon reflection, I decided to split the difference, since those who are the worst among us are also often the wealthiest.

They don't belong to OUR society as in you and me and people who love America and what it's supposed to stand for, however they are part of America, if only in that they live here.(infestation)

Indeed, in a healthy republic they would be outlaws and criminals.

[hocndoc]

and then along came the internet and FreeRepublic.com